Guidance on Solid Waste Management
Senior urban decision-makers from developing and rapidly-emerging economies
face difficult decisions in managing solid waste generated by their cities.
Effective solid waste management systems are essential to productive,
competitive, healthy and well-functioning cities:
Waste can be a source of both earnings and savings in the local economy.
Along with waterways, solid waste is one of two main carriers and propagators
of infectious disease in cities and the main host environment for vermin.
Ineffective solid waste management practices make an unfavourable impression
on foreign investors and tourists. It may result in both loss of both
investment and revenues from these sources.
Typical Solid Waste Management Situations
Waste Collection and Street
Sweeping
- The waste collection service is strugglingto keep the city
clean.
- Not all of the city is covered by the collection service.
- Waste is accumulating in streets, squatter settlements and
blocking drains to become a public health concern.
- Despite low levels of service, costs are high and form a large
share of municipal budget.
- Quantities of solid waste are growing faster than the city's
ability to cope with it.
Waste Disposal
- Current disposal is by dumping.
- Existing dumpsites are a concern for political, environmental,
public health and safety reasons.
- Finding new sites is becoming more difficult due to land
shortages and opposition.
- You are told that sanitary landfill is the best way forward but
it seems expensive and people object to having sites near them.
- Many companies claim to have solutions to waste disposal
problems but you do not know who to believe
Choices
In responding to common solid waste management situations or conditions,
decision-makers face the following choices:
- How to set priorities for scare municipal resources as between solid
waste management and other pressing needs, e.g., water supply, health
protection, or transport, and within the amount of funds dedicated to
solid waste issues.
- How best to extend solid waste management services to new developments
on the fringes of their city, and catch up with needs in existing communities,
many of which are currently served only by the informal sector.
- How to charge residents and businesses, many with very limited resources,
for solid waste management services when they have never paid anything,
or much before.
- How to select among different competing technologies for reducing,
collecting, disposing of and converting solid waste, and among specific
suppliers of solid waste management services in a manner that takes
into account the best long-term interests of their city.
- How to choose between environmental concerns and economic interests
when these appear to be in conflict, e.g., when a business threatens
to close or to move elsewhere and throw people out of work rather than
paying more for solid waste disposal.
Comparing Typical
Solid Waste Management Practices |
Activity |
Low Income |
Middle Income |
High Income |
Source reduction |
No organized programs, but reuse and low per capita
waste generation rates are common. |
Some discussion of source reduction, but rarely
incorporated into an organized program. |
Organized education programs now emphasize source
reduction and reuse of materials. |
Collection |
Sporadic and inefficient. Service may be limited to
high-visibility areas, wealthy households, businesses willing to pay. |
Improved service and increased collection from
residential areas. May have large vehicle fleet and more mechanization. |
Collection rate greater than 90 percent. Compactor
trucks and mechanized vehicles common. |
Recycling |
Most recycling is through informal sector and waste
picking. Mainly localized markets and imports of materials for recycling. |
Informal sector still involved; some advanced sorting
and processing facilities; materials often imported for recycling. |
Recycable material collection, high-technology sorting
and processing facilities. Attentive to long-term markets. |
Composting |
Rarely undertaken formally, though waste stream has
high proportion of organic content. Opportunity to do more here for economic
and environmental gain. |
Large composting plants generally unsuccessful; some
small-scale plants more sustainable. |
More popular at both backyard and large-scale
facilities. Waste stream has smaller portion of compostables than in other
economies. |
Incineration |
Not common or successful because of high capital and
operating costs, high moisture content and high proportion of inert
matter. |
Some incinerators used, but experiencing financial and
operational difficulties; not as common as in high-income economies. |
Prevalent in areas with high land costs. Most have
some environmental controls and some heat recovery system. |
Landfilling |
Low-technology sites, usually open dumping of
wastes. |
Some controlled and sanitary landfills, with some
environmental controls. Open dumping still common. |
Sanitary landfills with a combination of liners, leak
detection, leachate collection systems, gas collection/treatment. |
Costs |
Collection costs form 80-90 percent of municipal solid
waste management budgets. Waste fees regulated by some local governments, but
fee collection may be very inefficient. |
Collection costs represent 50-80 percent of municipal
solid waste management budget. Waste fees regulated by some local and national
governments. Innovations in collection are being attempted. |
Collection costs represent under 10 percent of budget.
Large allocations to intermediate waste treatment facilities. Upfront community
participation reduces costs and increases options available to waste management
planners, e.g., recycling and composting. |
Assessing Different
Solid Waste Management Options |
Based on extensive research, the World Bank has developed some guidelines
to success in planning and implementing solid waste management solutions
|
Solutions
|
Description
|
Comments on Application
|
Source reduction
|
Volume of solid waste is reduced by reducing packaging, disposable products,
etc.
|
Could introduce advanced practices, reducing waste at source. Many sources
lie outside individual cities.
|
Uncontrolled dumping
|
Controlled application of waste on land.
|
Low-cost and low-technology solution when land available. Risks in certain
circumstances, e.g., to water supply.
|
Sanitary landfilling
|
Controlled application of waste on land.
|
Low-cost and low-technology solution when land available. Risks in certain
circumstances, e.g., to water supply.
|
Composting
|
Biological decomposition of organic matter in waste under controlled
conditions.
|
Needs correct proportion of bio-degradable material in waste. May be
expensive where no market for compost. Large decentralised schemes claimed
to be unsuccessful.
|
Multi-material recycling
|
Complements composting Design products for ready recycling/reuse, sorting
by consumers and pick-up by types of materials.
|
Recycling and reuse already occurs in many countries as a matter of economic
necessity.
|
Incineration
|
Controlled burning of waste at high temperatures to reduce its volume;
possibility to gain energy from combustion.
|
High capital cost; requires skilled operation and control. Waste must
have high calorific value. Advantage if land not available for landfill.
|
Gasification
|
Biological decomposition of organic matter in waste under controlled
conditions to obtain methane and other gases.
|
High cost and technologically complicated.
|
Refuse derived fuel
|
Separation of combustible materials from solid waste to be used for fuel
purposes.
|
Assumes combustible material not separated out. Costs and operational
issues not widely known for large-scale operations.
|
Pyrolysis
|
High temperature conversion of organic material in absence of oxygen
to obtain combustible by-products.
|
Capital intensive with high running costs, and technically complex.
|
Suggestions for Successful
Muncipal Solid Waste Management |
DO |
DO
NOT |
Undertake an integrated strategic planning
process |
Rush into investments in new equipment without putting
them into a strategic context |
Ensure wide support for the planning process and the
results |
Confine consultation to an elite group |
Ensure that the target service level is
affordable |
Base choices on what is supposedly the most "advanced"
technology, but is affordable only by a minority |
Undertake a detailed study of the existing
situation |
Duplicate existing studies |
Measure key factors in your city as a basis for
decisions |
Rely on the literature for big decisions |
Apply an impartial process to select options on the
basis of benefits |
Sign up with a specific commercial vendor without
considering all the options |
Do detailed analysis of costs |
Underestimate costs or overestimate revenues |
Separate responsibility for providing the service from
day-to-day service deliverable |
Delegate responsibility for a key public service to
the private sector, though they may do day-to-day delivery |
Consider private sector delivery as an option |
Forget the conditions for success: competition, transparency and
accountability |
Consider different options for user charges to cover the shortfall
in revenues |
Apply user charges without considering the needs of
the poor for solid waste management services |
Improve performance of collection, sweeping and
transport services |
Buy costly "high-tech" vehicles |
Introduce preventative maintenance for vehicles |
Tolerate a high percentage of vehicles in for service
at any one time |
Give priority to extending services to unserviced
areas |
Forget about health risks to the whole population of
uncollected solid waste |
Solid Waste Connect To: |
How |
Implications
|
Land-Use |
Finding disposal sites. Avoiding old
dump sites. |
Shapes planning and resident response
at margins. |
Infrastructure |
Providing transport, energy and water
to waste disposal and recycling facilities. |
Efficiency of waste reduction and
disposal. |
Buildings |
Amount of waste generated in
construction and future operation. |
Economic viability of waste reduction
and recycling. |
Services to Buildings |
Arranging recycling services. |
Economic viability of waste reduction
and recycling.Efficiency and attractiveness to investors. |
Services to People |
Amount of waste generated as part of
providing services. Role in shaping public behaviour and attitudes, e.g.,
toward informal sector. |
Success in marketing changes in
behaviour that produces volumes of solid waste. |
Source: Cities Solution Network 2001 (no longer operational!)
|